Lilly Valley (Pty) Ltd v Farmfood & Rural Workers (J895/97) [1997] ZALC 6 (8 October 1997)

Lilly Valley (Pty) Ltd v Farmfood & Rural Workers (J895/97) [1997] ZALC 6 (8 October 1997)

The court found that the applicant had established a prima facie case for urgent interim relief. The conduct alleged, if not restrained, could cause irreparable harm to the applicant's business interests and the safety of its suppliers and customers. The court was satisfied that the requirements for an interim...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1997] ZALC 6
Parties
Applicant: Lilly Valley (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Farmfood & Rural Workers; Respondent: Jackson Mwale; Respondent: Evelyn Marubela; Respondent: Thomas Bhuku
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
8 October 1997
Case Number
J895/97
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Interim Interdict
Outcome
Interim interdict granted; rule nisi issued; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
Interdict, Urgent Application, Restraint of Conduct
Labour Law Civil Procedure Interdict Urgent Application Restraint of Conduct

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lilly Valley (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Farmfood & Rural Workers

Respondent

Jackson Mwale

Respondent

Evelyn Marubela

Respondent

Thomas Bhuku

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Interim Interdict

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondents should be interdicted from assaulting or threatening suppliers or customers of the applicant.
  2. 2 Whether the respondents should be restrained from approaching within 100 metres of the applicant's working area without written authorisation.
  3. 3 Whether costs should be awarded against the respondents.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had established a prima facie case for urgent interim relief. The conduct alleged, if not restrained, could cause irreparable harm to the applicant's business interests and the safety of its suppliers and customers. The court was satisfied that the requirements for an interim interdict were met and accordingly issued a rule nisi, granting the applicant interim protection pending the return date. Costs were reserved for determination at a later stage.

Court Disposition

Interim interdict granted; rule nisi issued; costs reserved.

Orders

  • A rule nisi is issued calling on the respondents to show cause at 10 am on 22 October 1997 why they should not be interdicted or restrained from assaulting or threatening to assault past, current or prospective suppliers or customers of the applicant.
  • The respondents are interdicted from approaching within 100 metres of the applicant's working area at 35 Klein Eilandsvlei, district Randfontein, unless expressly authorised in writing by the applicant.